Skip to main content

About your Search

20130204
20130212
STATION
MSNBC 5
MSNBCW 5
CSPAN 1
CSPAN2 1
LANGUAGE
English 12
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
the 2011 debt ceiling disaster, and it is $1.7 trillion in cuts. there is not a dime of new revenue there. here is the chart when you add the $737 billion in new revenue agreed to during the fiscal cliff deal. republicans are winning the battle, wouldn't you say, when it comes to balancing? over two-thirds of deficit reduction has come from cuts to domestic programs, and it's not exactly fair. but now the house progressive caucus has come out with what they call the balancing act. it's a common-sense plan to reduce the deficit by closing tax loopholes and cutting wasteful defense spending. here is the chart of the plan. there is $1.7 trillion in new revenue. the $1.7 trillion in spending cuts is still there. this looks like a much fairer chart than the current system, don't you think? and it's estimated to reduce the deficit by $3.3 trillion. remember, we're trying to hit $4 trillion. so we're getting closer. the plan ends tax loopholes for yachts and for jets. it reduces the corporate meal and entertainment deduction to 25%. you can't write off the whole dinner anymore. it ends fossil fu
worried about raising the national debt ceiling, which is $16.4 trillion. republicans hoped to try to force a general deduction of overall spending. it came down to this deal where it was they would do a supercommittee that would come up with a deal by the end of 2011. they did not. if they did not reach a deal by the end of 2012, they would have mandatory budget cuts of $1.2 trillion over 10 years. the first were supposed to kick in this year. now that they have extended that, we are looking at about $90 million of mandatory cuts split between regular government spending and defense spending. they are supposed to kick in march 1. host: what is the seacrest -- what does the sequestration mean for the defense department? caller: you are looking at about $15 billion of cuts. unlike other cuts that could happen to government agencies, they go across the board. you are looking at taking major chunk of operations out of programs. we are fighting a major war in afghanistan. that is separated. you are looking at the cuts taking effect in areas that are having a disproportionate effect and
steps they want to put in place to get more people back to work. >> fiscal cliff, the debt ceiling, immigration he said there's room but, look, republicans need to get religion on this. do you expect a similar tone in the state of the union? >> he has a limited amount of time. they feel they have a so-called m mandate from their victory not losing the senate. i think it's kind of full speed ahead for the president right now. he's going to go as bold as he can go, limited amount of time. i think i disagree a little bit on the economy. i think it's a course correction for him. i feel he's maybe second-guessing, not talking about the economy during his inaugural speech, now maybe i should have talked about that. >> which is fascinating because if you look at the first term in a lot of ways, you know, he started off -- you had a republican party that was largely kind of in the doldrums and he started off with economic stimulus and health care which united the party in some way. is he -- is he smart to refocus on the economy, jim? >> yes. >> and probably the more important question, is
. if republicans had time to this issue and said, you know, were not going to raise the debt ceiling unless at a certain amount of cuts, they would've caved in the end, would've been disastrous, much like what the fiscal cliff and i think boehner and right together did a very nice job convincing republicans that you can't govern from the house, but sure to be careful about getting into these high-profile, high-stakes, last-minute negotiations with the president. it worked in the white house, i worked in three administrations. they have a tremendous institutional at vantage in this kind of bias. i think what republicans have to do is avoid these sites come at the straps the democrats and president obama are laying, provide an alternative to passing legislation, just to show them this is how we recover if we have the powers of the presidency and the senate and to be careful and frankly the rougher edges republicans sometimes have. >> host: some republicans aren't happy sr is moving ahead. >> guest: i think if they had gone ahead, it would have been cataclysmic for the republican party. i say
sequestration or the debt ceiling. they are still doing that. the president was successful when he went to the american people, not just rallying democrats, but rallying the people who say let's get on with it, let's try to balance the budget, and the difficulty we have here now is the republicans are just talking about cutting programs, and they have targeted social security, medicaid, and medicare, and the president is saying we have to reform these systems, but we still need more revenue, and this is a worry that they just refuse to discuss. i don't see how you can ignore revenues if you talk about a budget. >> sir, if you will, we look at the time clock ahead of us, we have the state of the union coming up next week, but it's the sequester at the end of the month, the beginning of march, that everybody is worried about and what those cuts will mean in terms of defense spending and what it will mean to low-income families in this country. just a short time ago leon panetta was asked directly about the sequester in his hearing. i want to play it for everybody. >> we've implemented a f
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)